ign.com rates Mighty Avengers Future

[goldenfist]

Here's what Ign.com had to rate on the Mighty Avengers.

Mighty Avengers
Current Creative Team:
Writer: Brian Michael Bendis
Artist: Frank Cho
Start With: Issue #1 (March 2007)
Title Analysis: Avengers: The Initiative may have proved that there's plenty of room in the world for a second Avengers book, but if Mighty Avengers is any indication, three is definitely pushing it. The core concept makes sense. Whereas New Avengers focuses on the underground team of heroes still fighting against Registration, Mighty stars the best of the best of Tony Stark's Initiative. Co-led by Iron Man and Ms. Marvel, the new team also includes the likes of Wonder Man (in his hideous leisure suit), The Sentry (in his best Fabio haircut), and Ares (he has a big ax). Writer Brian Michael Bendis has chosen to give this series a more old school Avengers feel, both in the types of enemies they face and in his writing style. It's interesting at first to watch Bendis make heavy use of word balloons in his dialog, but the effect quickly grows old and tired.
However, Mighty's real bane is its shipping schedule. Since March we've received exactly four issues, and #5 is still nowhere to be found. Granted, this is hardly on the scale of the delays seen in Ultimates 2 or All-Star Batman and Robin, but for a book that is so important to the ongoing events of the Marvel Universe it's plenty annoying. We love Frank Cho's bombastic and detailed pencils, but this series really needs to get on the fast track. As it stands, New Avengers will likely begin dealing with the ramifications of Mighty Avengers' second arc before Mighty even finishes its first. Speaking of the second arc, it looks to feature an army of alien symbiotes (the creatures that made Venom and Carnage) wreaking havoc on New York. We're happy that the uncannily speedy Mark Bagley will be on board as artist, but when was the last time anything good came of symbiotes?
Currently: Poor
Future Prognosis: Decent

Post your opinion about this topic.

[thew40]

Unfortunately, I have to agree with this. While the writing is good and the art is cheesecake enjoyment, it's just not up to par with "New Avengers." Plus, Girltron is getting really old.

I have high hopes for Bagley, though!

~W~

[balok]

They're still fighting Girltron?!? That's quite some decompression. I'd have thought they'd be onto the next plot by now.

I long for the days when folks look back on this era of Marvel with the same "don't step in that" attitude we now have for foil covers, variant covers and incessent relaunches for the purpose of creating new first issues.

[thew40]

They're still fighting Girltron because the comic has been delayed.

~W~

[balok]

Ah. Marvel seems to have that problem a lot the last few years.

[spiderwasp]

thew40 said:

Unfortunately, I have to agree with this. While the writing is good and the art is cheesecake enjoyment, it's just not up to par with "New Avengers." Plus, Girltron is getting really old.

I have high hopes for Bagley, though!

~W~

I'm confused. The writing is good but the book isn't? Is it really that hard to say something bad about Bendis? If the book is not that good, that is a direct reflection of the writing. I really don't see how you can separate the two. I understand statements regarding movies like "The acting was good but the movie wasn't," or in comics "The art was good but the book wasn't," but criticizing the book but still saying the writing was good is tantamount to saying "She sure is a great cook but she makes lousy food."

[spiderwasp]

goldenfist said:

Title Analysis: Avengers: The Initiative may have proved that there's plenty of room in the world for a second Avengers book, but if Mighty Avengers is any indication, three is definitely pushing it. .

My problem with this statement is that I really only consider there to be two monthly Avengers books. Initiative has no more to do with Avengers than Illuminati. Yes, the book does feature Ironman, Yellowjacket, Justice, Rage, and a couple of other Avengers and former Avengers along with a lot of other people, but I've not seen any indication that the Initiative is actually a part of the Avengers, or that trainees are training to become Avengers. As a matter of fact, it seems more likely to me that the Mighty Avengers could be considered a part of the Initiative more than the Initiative being a part of the Avengers. Marvel is just throwing the word Avengers around to boost sales. It's a good thing that Defenders isn't still around or, with Dr. Strange, Hulk, Sub-mariner, and Hell-cat as members, Marvel would market is as Avengers: The Defenders. Come to think of it, I guess that's also what they're doing with New Avengers, which in my opinion, also has nothing to do with the Avengers (I mean they're not a sanctioned Avengers team) so maybe I'm down to feeling like there's only one monthly title.
Sadly, even though there is only one title, it has to be written by Bendis. I do feel that this book has the potential to be great but, with him on board, the best I can do is say that it's much better than New Avengers. I suppose that's praise, but not exactly high praise.

[thew40]

spiderwasp said:

thew40 said:

Unfortunately, I have to agree with this. While the writing is good and the art is cheesecake enjoyment, it's just not up to par with "New Avengers." Plus, Girltron is getting really old.

I have high hopes for Bagley, though!

~W~

I'm confused. The writing is good but the book isn't? Is it really that hard to say something bad about Bendis? If the book is not that good, that is a direct reflection of the writing. I really don't see how you can separate the two. I understand statements regarding movies like "The acting was good but the movie wasn't," or in comics "The art was good but the book wasn't," but criticizing the book but still saying the writing was good is tantamount to saying "She sure is a great cook but she makes lousy food."

Allow me to clarify.

It's good, but it's not great. It's not at "New Avengers" level, which is more strongly written. On a scale of 1-5 (1 being bad, 5 being good), "New Avengers" would be a 5 and "Mighty Avengers" would be a 3. (And before anyone says anything, this is only a scale used for this demonstration)

My major complaint is that it's taking too long to wrap up this story. Girltron is getting old fast. I want the comic out on time.

Frank Cho, while a strong artist, just isn't a good fit for this book. It's just not his style. There's too much cheesecake. Girltron is hawt and all that . . . but . . . meh . . . it doesn't do it for me.

Now, there are plenty of things I like about this book. I think the Black Widow, Iron Man, Ms. Marvel, and the Wasp are all quite well-written. I like the position they're in - the forefront of the Intiative. A great parallel to the anti-establishment feel of the "New Avengers." I'm even seeing a spark of potential with the Sentry. Just a spark, though.

(still not impressed with Ares, however)

I like "Mighty Avengers." I think that with Bagley on the art, it'll improve and we'll see it back on schedule. It can only help this book. Four issues in and while it started out strong, the lack of issues and the cheesecake art is hurting it.

And if you don't think I can say anything bad about Bendis, check out my "Avengers Disassembled" review.
vplexico.proboards60.com/index.cgi?board=events&action=display&thread=1190379896

~W~

[thew40]

balok said:

Ah. Marvel seems to have that problem a lot the last few years.

Not just Marvel.

DC/Wildstorm has all sorts of issues with a lot of their series. Esspecially their "big guns" like the Johns/Donner Superman run, All-Star Batman and Robin, All-Star Superman, WildCATS, The Authority, and Wonder Woman.

These days, Marvel has gotten better about it. Books are delayed, but out of the big books, it's only really Mighty Avengers and Astonishing X-Men, I believe.

Furthermore, in response to your "don't step in that" comments . . . Marvel hasn't had foil covers in a year or two. Relaunches occur usually because # 1's sell stronger than # 256 or what-have-you. As far as variant covers go . . . meh, some people are into that sorta thing, I guess.

~W~

[balok]

Yes, thanks, I'm not an idiot. I know why these things were done. But I have always contended that they're cheap stunts designed to rope in the foolish. They exist ONLY to boost sales, when the correct way to boost sales is hire more talented creators. They represent an era when sales were the only thing that mattered, and things like creativity, continuity, respect for characterization, and good art were considered expenses to be minimized at best. The current Marvel management hold much the same view, far as I can tell: most of what they do (and all of Civil War) is done exclusively to boost sales, at the cost of the things I mentioned. I'm hoping the folks amused by it get bored and leave the hobby. Then maybe we'll get back to quality storytelling.

[thew40]

balok said:

Yes, thanks, I'm not an idiot.

Uhhh, I didn't call you one. I didn't mean to imply that you were.

I know why these things were done. But I have always contended that they're cheap stunts designed to rope in the foolish. They exist ONLY to boost sales, when the correct way to boost sales is hire more talented creators.

Well, if ain't broke, don't fix it, right?

Cheap as it may be, Marvel is a company. They need money. It sounds selfish and it sounds foolish, but if it works, it works, ya know?

They represent an era when sales were the only thing that mattered, and things like creativity, continuity, respect for characterization, and good art were considered expenses to be minimized at best. The current Marvel management hold much the same view, far as I can tell: most of what they do (and all of Civil War) is done exclusively to boost sales, at the cost of the things I mentioned.

Blah blah, blah blah blah blah.

Not necessarily. Plenty of people are being creative - just not in the way you like.

For example, I find Bendis' "Ultimate Spider-Man" scripts creative in terms of panel layout. Opinions on creative are usually based on the person.

And it's not like all continunity and characterization has been thrown out the window. Older books and stories are still being referenced. You just don't read most of the comics anymore, so how would even know?

Deal with the fact that this isn't "your" Marvel anymore. Sorry. The comics are selling well and hey, they're getting pretty good reviews too.

I'm hoping the folks amused by it get bored and leave the hobby. Then maybe we'll get back to quality storytelling.

Ah, but there is quality storytelling! But how would you know since you don't read Marvel comics anymore?

~W~

[balok]

thew40 said:

Uhhh, I didn't call you one. I didn't mean to imply that you were.

No, but you did feel it necessary to explain why books get relaunched with new first issues. That's pretty obvious, so your explaining sorta comes off patronizing.

thew40 said:

Cheap as it may be, Marvel is a company. They need money. It sounds selfish and it sounds foolish, but if it works, it works, ya know?

Sure, but I contend the cheap stunts that damage the property generate money now, but may harm the company down the road are a poor idea. I place things like Civil War in that category.

thew40 said:

Not necessarily. Plenty of people are being creative - just not in the way you like.

That is certainly true.

thew40 said:

Opinions on creative are usually based on the person.

To some extent, but there are certain yardsticks by which such things may be judged. Creativity isn't defined as "I like it, so it's creative." Original ideas count. Respect for established characterization counts. Respect for the four-color milieu counts (and this is an area where Marvel has fallen down - they've traded comic book idealism for gritty realism. Realism is a worthwhile goal in some fiction, but comic books have long been about a world where real heroes matter. Marvel's traded that for something shabbier and less appealing. The big appeal of comic books has always been that good wins, ultimately. If I want to read stories about what happens when venal men run things, the newspaper is always available.

Probably the best example is Thunderbolts. Busiek came up with an interesting concept and told good stories about it. Compare that to the current book, which is basically Marvel taking a dump in the readers' brains.

thew40 said:

Deal with the fact that this isn't "your" Marvel anymore. Sorry. The comics are selling well and hey, they're getting pretty good reviews too.

I'm learning to. But I'm hoping it changes. Actually, I'm hoping sales fall to the point that Quesada, Bendis, and Millar get ridden out of town on a rail.

[thew40]

I don't understand why you hate Millar so much. Just because he wrote "Civil War?" Bendis, I guess, for "destroying" "your" book; and Quesada because he eats babies and steals old lady's purses . . . but why Millar?

And do you only look at the way he handled the characters? Or do you also look at technical issues, such as pacing, script, panel lay-out, etc?

~W~

[balok]

thew40 said:

I don't understand why you hate Millar so much.

I don't hate the man. I want him out of the business, which isn't the same thing at all. And yes, he and Quesada make the list because of Civil War, which I believe made the Marvel Universe unenjoyable and several key characters, notably Iron Man, into villains. It shows a profound disrespect for characterization and history.

I liked Millar's work on Ultimate Avengers, but feel Marvel made a serious error "ultimizing" their main universe.

Millar is a competent storyteller as regards pacing, dialogue (panel layout is usually the responsibility of the penciller, although the scripter can certainly suggest ideas). Quesada's work is the more odious, to be sure. Civil War would have been a fine Ultimate universe story. It didn't belong in 616.

Bendis is just such a bad writer, except within a very narrow genre (single character, noir books) that he shouldn't be employed at all. I only hope your generation soon realizes this and quits buying his drek.

[goldenfist]

I doubt that will happen Balok, Bendis signed a contract with
Marvel to stay until the next decade.

I also doubt that Millar will leave Marvel unless he is asked back
to write the Authority book.

[thew40]

balok said:

thew40 said:

I don't understand why you hate Millar so much.

I don't hate the man. I want him out of the business, which isn't the same thing at all. And yes, he and Quesada make the list because of Civil War, which I believe made the Marvel Universe unenjoyable and several key characters, notably Iron Man, into villains. It shows a profound disrespect for characterization and history.

I liked Millar's work on Ultimate Avengers, but feel Marvel made a serious error "ultimizing" their main universe.

You just said you want him out of the business and then turned around and said you liked his work on "Ultimate Avengers." Care to clarify?

~W~

[redstatecap]

goldenfist said:

Here's what Ign.com had to rate on the Mighty Avengers.

*cracks knuckles*

Title Analysis: Avengers: The Initiative may have proved that there's plenty of room in the world for a second Avengers book, but if Mighty Avengers is any indication, three is definitely pushing it.

Correction: two books written by an incompetent is pushing it.

The core concept makes sense.

Yeah, you know the Avengers was published for 30 years before Bendis showed, so I guess the concept did make sense.

Whereas New Avengers focuses on the underground team of heroes still fighting against Registration,...

Except they're not.

...Mighty stars the best of the best of Tony Stark's Initiative. Co-led by Iron Man and Ms. Marvel, the new team also includes the likes of Wonder Man (in his hideous leisure suit), The Sentry (in his best Fabio haircut), and Ares (he has a big ax).

Excellent analysis, Captain Obvious.

Writer Brian Michael Bendis has chosen to give this series a more old school Avengers feel, both in the types of enemies they face and in his writing style.

Rather, Bendis has chosen to bastardize the "classic" Avengers style. Ultron does not have tits. Ares is not and never should be an Avenger.
Bendis also imported his trademark "nothing happens" style from New Avengers. Really, this book is "New Avengers II" with a "Classic" cast.

It's interesting at first to watch Bendis make heavy use of word balloons in his dialog, but the effect quickly grows old and tired.

That's because Bendis can't f*cking write. The more of his words we have to look at, the more obvious that becomes.

However, Mighty's real bane is its shipping schedule. Since March we've received exactly four issues, and #5 is still nowhere to be found.

And this is new under Quesada?

Granted, this is hardly on the scale of the delays seen in Ultimates 2 or All-Star Batman and Robin, but for a book that is so important to the ongoing events of the Marvel Universe it's plenty annoying.

I haven't seen anything important yet, outside of Ultron with tits.

We love Frank Cho's bombastic and detailed pencils, but this series really needs to get on the fast track. As it stands, New Avengers will likely begin dealing with the ramifications of Mighty Avengers' second arc before Mighty even finishes its first.

The New Avengers haven't "dealt with" anything in 34 issues. The lateness of Mighty will be nullified by the inaction of New. OK...OK...The New Avengers might talk about something that happened in Mighty.

Speaking of the second arc, it looks to feature an army of alien symbiotes (the creatures that made Venom and Carnage) wreaking havoc on New York. We're happy that the uncannily speedy Mark Bagley will be on board as artist, but when was the last time anything good came of symbiotes?

This plot device is right in keeping with the rest of Bendis' work, including the New Avengers stalemated by Ninjas for 6 issues. When was the last time anything good came of Ninjas? Or Skrulls?
Yes, it's crap -- but no worse than events in New Avengers.

Currently: Poor
Future Prognosis: Decent

Translation: This book does not have Wolverine and Spider-Man pumping sales, therefore its future is uncertain.

Post your opinion about this topic.

Opinion posted.

RSC

[balok]

thew40 said:

You just said you want him out of the business and then turned around and said you liked his work on "Ultimate Avengers." Care to clarify?

I liked him on Ultimates. Then he came over to main Marvel and shat all over it, and my opinion changed. I don't know how else to say it.

[BigDuke]

Aside from the pace of the story, which is prevalent in almost everything I am reading, I like this book. I wish it would come out regularly, and that wish will be granted with the artist change.

Having a more action packed Avengers title like MA, makes it easier for me to enjoy the more slowly paced NA.

Do I think Mr Bendis is the best? No, but he is okay. He's good on his good days and bad on his bad. He has had both on NA. But I think this book will survive, once it becomes regular.